Manned Space Fight May Hinge on Next Shuttle LaunchThe experts that now debate the costs and benefits of manned
space flight should consider that if the first photos of the moon landing were
of a robot rather than of a fellow member of the human race, the impact of the
event would have been much diminished.

The problem that has kept the space shuttle
Discovery bound firmly to earth for the last few days has been solved and
America’s space flight agency (NASA) is determined to launch on July 28th
-- perhaps even with only three of the usual four external fuel tank sensors.
We shouldn’t be astonished at NASA’s grim determination. There is more than
the maintenance of the International Space Station (ISS) and of NASA’s reputation
at stake. The success or failure of this shuttle flight, the first since Columbia’s fatal accident in February 2003, will influence
expert opinion on the future of manned space flight.
SEE ALSO: Russians Fret That U.S. Endangers Manned Space Flight, From Russia's
Novisti Newspaper, July 20

The debate about whether or not manned
space travel makes sense was spurred on in the fall of 2004 when the American
president addressed the subject during his reelection campaign, and he described
his dream of sending astronauts to the moon in 2020 and to Mars by 2030. The
European Space Agency (ESA) was inspired and announced that it also wanted
to undertake manned space flight. In Germany’s Parliament the SPD* faction issued a clear rejection
of such “fantasies of omnipotence” by announcing that “the Federal Government
will not invest any money in expensive and dangerous adventures” but would
stick to a successful program of unmanned space flight. The Germans did offer
to serve as doorman. The Minister of Research (sic), EdlegardBulmahn, said it elegantly, “When the first American
astronaut steps onto Mars, our robots will hold the door open for him.”

Basically, the arguments are as follows:
manned space flight’s costs and risks are too high. Bob Park, a physics professor
and space flight expert at the University of Maryland, is a vehement critic. He points out the unpleasant
side effects on the astronauts’ health, the least harmful of which include
digestion problems. Naturally, such problems don’t bother robots very much.
Park’s main argument is that the radiation levels to which astronauts are
exposed -- many times the maximum levels considered safe here on Earth --
pose an unacceptable risk.

The German Physics Association adds that,
since robotics has made such great advances in the last few decades, the presence
of humans in space now appears to be unnecessary, and scientific or economic
gains that would justify the high costs of manned space flight have yet to
be found. For example, robots are much better suited for experiments in weightlessness.
In addition, the very much higher costs generated by keeping the people on
board safe are an argument for unmanned space fight.

Ulrich Walter, a professor of space flight
technology at the Technical University of Munich and a veteran of a 1993 space
flight on board the space shuttle Columbia, rejects the costs argument. The 1992 Eureka Project,
a free floating unmanned platform for experiments in space, was, at €412 million
per experiment, five times as expensive as a comparable manned mission. However,
it would be very difficult to calculate the costs of a settlement on the moon
or on Mars.

July 20, 1969

In contrast, the safety problem is most
difficult. Although every technical thing that one can imagine to make the
shuttles safe has been done in NASA’s research centers, the Discovery incident
shows that there is really no such thing as a routine space launch, notwithstanding
more than 110 successful launches and highly detailed control procedures.
The horror that kept people glued to their TV screens in 1986 when the shuttle
Challenger exploded 73 seconds after take-off and was, sadly, repeated during
Columbia’s fateful 2003 landing attempt, would certainly have been much less
intense had the crew been made up of robots. Only the engineers would have
mourned. There’s always some level of risk.

There is one indisputable advantage humans
have over robots. When the picture of the first man on the moon was broadcast
around the world, many could identify with it. Whether a planet is explored
by telescopes, robots or humans make a huge difference. People are interested
in people. And thus the day that the first human sets foot on another planet
will draw much, much more worldwide attention than will the results of any
scientific experiments.

* Translator’s note: SPD is the abbreviation
for the Socialist Party of Germany, currently in coalition with the Green
Party to form the German government.